Killtown on 9/11

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 





Have you obtained any copies of the original videos and had them professionally tested for fakery, CGI or anything along those lines? No? Then you have no verifiable anything.


And while he's at it, perhaps he could also bring forth the evidence of September Clues' claim that the towers were EMPTY, that there were no victims, and that all the victims' families are actors.....because that is their contention. That claim alone says something about the credibility of that group.




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Please take some time and read some of these technical papers written by experts on the demolition of the WTC, there is science that supports this and most of the video evidence supports demolition in their opinions.

www.ae911truth.org...

Science cannot support all the other theories of the demise of the WTC, only demolition can be supported by real science.
edit on 28-6-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by twitchy
why do I feel betrayed by that?

Oh don't get all worked up and start running around your room yelling "COINTELPRO SHILL!!!"



Nah, I'm just not a proponent of the 'no explosions' theory.



reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


My apologies to you bonez, recently I've taken a hiatus from the 9-11 forum, and have no intentions of getting dragged into a point by point debate, with you particularly. I've got the "Been There, Done That" ATS badge for the 9-11 forum, but I don't make things up and I rarely say anything on here without being able to provide a source for it so if you'd like to review any of the material I've posted previously, be my guest.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


It's good to know that you're half-way there. I hope to provide the "nudge" that helps you see what I and others see.









edit on 28-6-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord



Originally posted by pshea38

And You in a position of authority.

Why would that preclude me from expressing a valid opinion?


It wouldn't.
My question still stands. How many sheep will follow?

If you have studied the septemberclues methodology in both its main
presentation and more especially the cluesforum, you would know that Nothing is even
nearly accepted unless it can be validated by various independant reliable sources.

If you are genuine i will set you a challange.
I take it you will automatically enjoy going through a compulsary 18 page
thread and challanging yourself intellectually to rise to the occasion and
Debunk A September Clue

I myself didn't win any trips. but i don't exclude the possibility that i am
mentally challanged. I look Forward to hearing how you fare. Bon voyage.



I also take it that you, probably more than most, are compelled (by the very
nature of your creation) to seek the whole truth, warts and all.
After all you are the man who had ultimate say (i presume?) in directing most
9/11 fakery threads to the hoax (i.e. deliberate deception or Lie) section.
So, in all fairness, We Here have to believe that you are, at least, well informed.





I know you are not stupid so there is some other reason why you, and abovetopsecret
in general, continue to ridicule sites such as septemberclues,

Because their videos are wrong, making incorrect assumptions based on exceptionally poor-quality source videos downloaded from YouTube.


This is simply not true and falsely discredits a forum where each individual is
urged to come to their own conclusions, based solely on stringent standards of
proof, compelling evidence and verifiable source materials. September clues is
more about exposing the role played by media fakery in modern life, and summing
them up so is misleading in the extreme and intellectually dishonest. Other events
incorporating fakery include 7/7 London and Madrid bombings, Tucson shootings,
moon landings etc. etc.




Media complicity was a necessary component of the 9/11 hoax,

Can you explain how the necessary hundreds of people involved at all the networks and news agencies with cameras turned on have been prevented from blowing a whistle?
edit on 27-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)


Yes.
You don't get on, unless you get on. That's the TV business, no?
cia director bill colby stated that the cia owned everyone of significance in
the broadcasting industry. Infiltrated Nations.
This actually adds weight to the notion that there were few if any victims
on 9/11, most being computer generated entities with no real existences.
How much easier to get people on board, selling a massive hoax over a Mass Murder?
Golden handshakes all round and almost guaranteed career advancement.
In such a lucrative/fickle industry. Priceless.

It's like a private army. You don't do if you don't know who to salute or
who to take orders from.

Ha. It's all too simple really. The number of actors, liars and frauds already exposed
is a joke. Damn. If only the whole system wasn't rotten to the very core,
these people might be punished.
The U.S., especially since the assassination of JFK, is
overtaken by shadow forces. who present cut-outs for presidents (computer voting makes
election rigging a piece of cake), and rule with horrendous zeal behind the scenes.

Poppy bush is one of the most heinous criminals in modern history ( who was directly
involved in the murder of JFK. Yet he is as free as a bird (free to mess with terri hatcher
anyways((seen on youtube link here))),
This nazi cancer is spreading.

This is also a very interesting thread
Is The Space Shuttle Program Faked?

There is some compelling photographic evidence over 17 pages that cannot, in honesty,
be lightly dismissed.

regards



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy



Originally posted by _BoneZ_
ATS has been moving the no-plane disinfo garbage to the HOAX bin where it belongs.

I hope that isn't accurate, threads discussing this aspect of 9-11 are being 'Hoaxed' because you don't like killtown?!?
edit on 28-6-2011 by twitchy because: My Doughnuts Had Holes In Them


This is accurate and raises an immediate red flag to anyone who has studied the
evidence for 9/11 tv fakery, as presented by september clues, killtown, mike sparks et al.
The intellect that is jim fetzer had a incisive thread dumped into the hoax bin.
If you ever listened to his podcasts, you would realise how honest and scientific he is,
and how calling him a knowing hoaxer is so contemptible.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Denial of media complicity in the hoax that was 9/11 is paramount as the
implications of such a disclosure are vast.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Please take some time and read some of these technical papers written by experts on the demolition of the WTC, there is science that supports this and most of the video evidence supports demolition in their opinions.

Trust me when I say, "I've been there, done that."

I never say anything lightly on ATS, and fully understand how my opinions may come across as one of the principal owners. And also, never take my comments specific to his issue as being indicative of a lack of acceptance of 9/11 conspiracies.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
If you are genuine i will set you a challange.
I take it you will automatically enjoy going through a compulsary 18 page
thread and challanging yourself intellectually to rise to the occasion and
Debunk A September Clue


If you are genuine, I accept your challenge with a caveat. Post the one aspect of the "September Clues" items you think is the most representative of the issue they're trying to present. Then here, on this thread, together we'll dissect and examine the validity of the evidence.



Edit to add...

To be fair, you should know that, "back in the day," I wrote a technical article titled, "Effective QuickTime Video," focused on helping developers work with the various compression codecs and editing software available. It ended up being republished by Apple (pre-web) and aspects of the advice are still being used in some tutorials to this day.
edit on 28-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 



Extending such a theory to its logical conclusion involves several dozen (if not hundreds) of people involved in putting the explosions in the buildings, then staying quiet once the collapse occurred.

It's much more plausible to consider that the poor structure design of the building, combined with the very-high probability there were corruption-inspired shortcuts and material substitutions in the construction, resulted in buildings that were much more fragile than expected. And the end result of the intense kinetic energy aircraft impact weakened much of the structure such that a rapid collapse was imminent.


[color=gold]“Cookie Cutter Corruption”?

Wow! Imagine, a recipe for perfect auto-destruct upon impact by Boeing 767 Airliner! I find it absolutely unbelievable that someone could “bake” two 110 level layer cake buildings with the exact shortcomings caused by corruption in each, causing both to fall in a near perfectly choreographed ballet of destruction.
If in fact the buildings were brought down because of corruption, and not demolition, why would the Port Authority have come out with all the information about the asbestos problems?

I have to ask where you came up with the number of people who must have been involved in the setup of “explosives” required to bring the 2 towers down. Just some thoughts…



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
Debunk A September Clue

"September Clues" has been thoroughly debunked numerous times and many years ago. Here are a couple examples to whet people's appetites:


Debunking September Clues - A point-by-point analysis


"September Clues": Busted


Google Video Link






Originally posted by pshea38
in directing most 9/11 fakery threads to the hoax (i.e. deliberate deception or Lie) section.

"September Clues" is nothing but deliberate deception. For instance, the "fade to black" has been thoroughly debunked and proven deliberate deception. As S.O. has shown in the video he posted earlier, the "fade to black" was just the network switching to a different shot and then back. The disinfo about them trying to cover up the "nose-out" is ludicrous as plenty of other shots caught the "nose-out" without being blacked out.

And speaking of the "nose-out", that has been shown to be a deliberately set-up hoax as well:


The nose-in/nose-out HOAX:




The above video shows clearly and quite conclusively that the "nose-out" disinformation is a deliberate HOAX, created by a disinformation artist to purposely and deliberately deceive. And that is why the "September Clues" and other no-planer/tv fakery disinformation threads are being sent to the HOAX bin. Where they belong.

And as such, it is my opinion and request that anyone who continues to peddle "September Clues" as "verifiable evidence", truthful, factual, should be have their membership revoked per the Terms and Conditions:


15). Posting: You will not Post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

and

15l.) [HOAX]: In the event you Post more than three items that are later determined to be of an obviously hoax, fraudulent, or faked nature, your account may be terminated without warning.


We can clearly see that "September Clues" is a deliberate HOAX. Now why is it still allowed to be spammed here? And why aren't the people spamming it as some sort of "evidence" still allowed to post here per the T&C's?



Originally posted by pshea38
September clues is more about exposing the role played by media fakery in modern life,

Looks to me like it is more about creating deliberate hoaxes to mislead people and discredit real 9/11 researchers.



Originally posted by pshea38
Other events
incorporating fakery include 7/7 London and Madrid bombings, Tucson shootings,
moon landings etc. etc.

Ahhh, yes. The "everything is faked" ploy. Nobody is falling for it, sorry.



Originally posted by pshea38
raises an immediate red flag to anyone who has studied the evidence for 9/11 tv fakery, as presented by september clues, killtown, mike sparks et al.

That's correct. Anyone that studies "September Clues" immediately sees the red flags of HOAXes and deliberate misleading and disinformation as has been shown above. That's why websites and forums within the 9/11 truth movement have banned the discussion, and the people that peddle anything that has to do with "September Clues" or any of the "no-planes at the WTC" theories.

Every single time a no-planes or tv fakery thread is made, it dies a very quick death into oblivion with a handful of flags who are probably all the same one or two members. Nobody is interested, cares, or are privy to the deliberate hoaxes and disinformation and they let those threads die. Spamming it over and over will not get new supporters.



Originally posted by pshea38
The intellect that is jim fetzer had a incisive thread dumped into the hoax bin. If you ever listened to his podcasts, you would realise how honest and scientific he is, and how calling him a knowing hoaxer is so contemptible.

Anyone who sides with the DEW "theories", or the no-planes at the WTC/tv fakery/September Clues "theories" will be known as hoaxers. It doesn't matter how many degrees or Ph.D's one has. If someone sides and peddles known disinformation and hoaxes, they will be labeled as such and segregate themselves to oblivion.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If you are genuine, I accept your challenge with a caveat. Post the one aspect of the "September Clues" items you think is the most representative of the issue they're trying to present. Then here, on this thread, together we'll dissect and examine the validity of the evidence.

I've challenged and asked them on numerous occasions to debate me on the radio show or debate forum if they had any real evidence of their claims. None of them will do it.

Nefomore has also asked them numerous times to come on the radio show for a debate. All we get is silence. It's okay for them to keep claiming "verifiable" this and "scientific" that, but they won't show any of it. Because it doesn't exist.

"September Clues" has been shown to be a deliberate hoax and deliberately misleading in this very thread alone. I think it's time for ATS to take a stance against known hoaxes per the T&C's as I've described in my previous post.


P.S., I think you'll be waiting awhile for your "most representative" aspect of "September Clues" because every single other challenge has gone unanswered. Maybe the Owner will get some play time. Good luck!



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by pshea38
If you are genuine i will set you a challange.
I take it you will automatically enjoy going through a compulsary 18 page
thread and challanging yourself intellectually to rise to the occasion and
Debunk A September Clue


If you are genuine, I accept your challenge with a caveat. Post the one aspect of the "September Clues" items you think is the most representative of the issue they're trying to present. Then here, on this thread, together we'll dissect and examine the validity of the evidence.



Edit to add...

To be fair, you should know that, "back in the day," I wrote a technical article titled, "Effective QuickTime Video," focused on helping developers work with the various compression codecs and editing software available. It ended up being republished by Apple (pre-web) and aspects of the advice are still being used in some tutorials to this day.
edit on 28-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)


OK.

But amidst the thousands of photographic and video anomalies presented, the probability
of Fakery increases dramatically with the number of cases examined.
If, or when you offer up a reasonable alternative explanation, please state how easily
you believe that similar results could be ascribed to computer generated imagery imperfections.
I think it unwise for anyone to come to an overall judgement based on one example of
one possible (even feasible) alternative explanation to only one of the very many definite anomalies.

I have no technical experience, but i will try to use sense.

p.s. i don't bother with bonez anymore. he spews out the same drivel everytime. He is
on his knees again begging to have any thread mentioning fakery removed to the hoax bin.
Why so uptight, we have to ask? He always protests too much.
9/11 Media Fakery is no hoax and AST labelling it so only serves to discredit itself.
edit on 29-6-2011 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
could be ascribed to computer generated imagery imperfections.
...to only one of the very many definite anomalies.

Once again, have you obtained any copies of the original videos and had them professionally analyzed to definitively find evidence of CGI or fakery? If not, then you can't make the claim.



Originally posted by pshea38
i don't bother with bonez anymore. he spews out the same drivel everytime. He is
on his knees again...He always protests too much.

That's right. All you can do is continue to disregard forum rules and talk about me, me, me instead of discussing the topic at hand.



Originally posted by pshea38
9/11 Media Fakery is no hoax

There are no words that I can use within the T&C to describe the disgust of your comment after watching this video:




"September Clues" was absolutely a deliberately-created hoax. It's proven right there in that video. Either it fooled you, or you are its creator under yet another sock peddling your hoax without impunity.

Either way, if you are going to sit there and claim that there was no hoax while watching that video, then something is seriously wrong.

As I've seen time and time again, proven hoaxes get moved to the hoax bin. This has been proven. It's time to move the "September Clues"/tv fakery hoax to the hoax bin permanently.






edit on 29-6-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord



Posted by Equiniox www.cluesforum.info...


Reel Deel made an awsome discovery a little while back I will explain the fake collpase evidence to
you in black n white.

NORTHWEST VIEW - Richard Drew

Jpeg 1 Is allegedly taken first in the descent it is half way down the trade centre. Notice the big
chunk of wall faced situated in the middle of the "shot".

Jpeg 1- Source imageshack.us...




Jpeg-2 Is Further down in it's descent. This time the chunk of debris Is situated just above the Marriott hotel.
Jpeg-2 Source- imageshack.us...





Notice the extensive damage to the facade that has been circled.




And amazingly the same piece of facade manages to repair itself on the way down.










Again this is just one of the many, many examples.
Is there any other reasonable conclusion?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
But amidst the thousands of photographic and video anomalies presented, the probability
of Fakery increases dramatically with the number of cases examined.

Which do you feel is the singularly most-damning case of fakery?

Just one clip or photo from the "September Clues" collection.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 


Using the images you provided, I can't come to the same conclusion.

I overlaid the images, and created a simple GIF animation (grayscale to preserve file size):


10 minutes in Photoshop, adjusting for the slight difference in rotation/perspective of the facade piece in the lower position, and it's clear that it is disintegrating as it's falling. Especially in the third facade column (third from the top in this horizontal position), as it looses a chunk on the way down.

It was simple to prove, and immediately obvious to my eye.

Anyone presenting anything as evidence should do at least as good a job as I did in 10 minutes.
edit on 29-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
The aluminum cladding is your "extensive damage" and that piece of aluminum is lost on its way down:




This "September Clues"/tv fakery "evidence" is so easy to debunk. Why is this being peddled as "evidence" again?



I see S.O. beat me to it. That's a "phail" for the "September Clues" "evidence". After all these years, they're still trying, aren't they?






edit on 29-6-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
reply to post by pshea38
 


Using the images you provided, I can't come to the same conclusion.

I overlaid the images, and created a simple GIF animation (grayscale to preserve file size):


10 minutes in Photoshop, adjusting for the slight difference in rotation/perspective of the facade piece in the lower position, and it's clear that it is disintegrating as it's falling. Especially in the third facade column (third from the top in this horizontal position), as it looses a chunk on the way down.

It was simple to prove, and immediately obvious to my eye.

Anyone presenting anything as evidence should do at least as good a job as I did in 10 minutes.
edit on 29-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)


Am i missing something here?
The top right corner facade has repaired itself on the way down.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
The top right corner facade has repaired itself on the way down

I don't follow what you mean by "repaired itself," could you elaborate?

There are certainly many aspects of the piece that are missing in the lower-shot, than in the upper-shot.


Is this your selection of the single-most representative image/video evidence from the "September Clues" collection?
edit on 29-6-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
...deliberate deception...thoroughly debunked ...deliberate deception....disinfo ...a deliberately set-up hoax...HOAX...disinformation is a deliberate HOAX...disinformation artist...purposely and deliberately deceive...fakery disinformation...HOAX bin. Where they belong.....should be have their membership revoked ...Terms and Conditions...deliberate HOAX.... Now why is it still allowed to be spammed here? ...spamming it ... still allowed to post here per the T&C's......creating deliberate hoaxes...mislead people and discredit real 9/11 researchers....."everything is faked" ploy...red flags of HOAXes ...deliberate misleading... disinformation ...banned the discussion...Nobody is interested, cares, or are privy...deliberate hoaxes and disinformation...Spamming it... Anyone who sides with...will be known as hoaxers.... peddles known disinformation and hoaxes, they will be labeled as such and segregate themselves to oblivion.

Jesus Christ... Look at that mind numbing and repetitive angry sounding drivel you posted. You're threatening people's accounts, calling for bans, and posting Libel. Why don't you sit down and try to relax, Archie?
The orange was very convincing.


Edit:
And that my friends is why nobody wants to participate in the 9-11 forum anymore. I refuse to debate anybody on that level. Mission accomplished.
edit on 29-6-2011 by twitchy because: Utter Disdain





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join